In an encrypted chat interview with The New Yorker (a sister publication of Ars Technica) on Tuesday, National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden fought back against unsubstantiated allegations by members of Congress that he is a Russian spy or collaborator.

Over the weekend, Rep. Mike Rogers, a Republican congressman from Michigan and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told Meet the Press that it was neither “coincidence” nor “a gee-whiz luck event that [Snowden] ended up in Moscow under the handling of the FSB,” referring to the Russian intelligence agency.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat who chairs the corresponding senate intelligence committee, also added: “He may well have [had help from Russia]. We don’t know at this stage.”

Snowden told TheNew Yorker: “[I] clearly and unambiguously acted alone, with no assistance from anyone, much less a government.” He added, “It won’t stick… because it’s clearly false, and the American people are smarter than politicians think they are.”

The whistleblower observed that if he were a Russian spy, why would he have turned up in Hong Kong, only to then be stuck in the transit zone of Moscow Sheremetyevo International Airport for 40 days?

“Spies get treated better than that,” he quipped.

Going it alone

In particular, Rogers said that some things Snowden did “were beyond his technical capabilities. Raises more questions. How [did] he arrange travel before he left? How he was ready to go? He had a go bag, if you will.”

Addressing this point, Snowden told The New Yorker that he had a “go bag packed since 2007. It’s not an exotic practice for people who have lived undercover on government orders.”

“It’s not the smears that mystify me,” Snowden added. “It’s that outlets report statements that the speakers themselves admit are sheer speculation.”

He also pointedly criticized journalists that allow such allegations to go unchallenged:

“‘We don’t know if he had help from aliens.’ ‘You know, I have serious questions about whether he really exists.’ It’s just amazing that these massive media institutions don’t have any sort of editorial position on this. I mean these are pretty serious allegations, you know? The media has a major role to play in American society, and they’re really abdicating their responsibility to hold power to account.”

Stuck in the middle

Snowden added that he never intended to end up in Russia; he only ended up there because he was stopped en route.

“I was only transiting through Russia,” he wrote. “I was ticketed for onward travel via Havana—a planeload of reporters documented the seat I was supposed to be in—but the State Department decided they wanted me in Moscow and cancelled my passport.”

So why doesn’t Snowden simply leave?

“When we were talking about possibilities for asylum in Latin America, the United States forced down the Bolivian President’s plane,” he said. But if he could travel with a guarantee that the US would not interfere, “I would of course do so.”

Snowden again underscored that “in nine months, no one has credibly shown any harm to national security” from his revelations, “nor any ill intent.” Moreover, he pointed out that “the President himself admitted both that changes are necessary and that he is certain the debate my actions started will make us stronger.”

Snowden concluded by saying that he “knew what he was getting into” when he set this entire operation into motion.

“At least the American public has a seat at the table now,” he said. “It may sound trite,” but if “I end up disgraced in a ditch somewhere, but it helps the country, it will still be worth it.”

Share this story

Cyrus Farivar
Cyrus is a former Senior Tech Policy Reporter at Ars Technica, and is also a radio producer and author. His latest book, Habeas Data, about the legal cases over the last 50 years that have had an outsized impact on surveillance and privacy law in America, is out now from Melville House. He is based in Oakland, California. Emailcyrus.farivar@arstechnica.com//Twitter@cfarivar

He lied to his employers, so how do we know he isn't lying now? If they couldn't tell the difference, how can we?

His employers lied to us, so how do we know they aren't lying now? Snowden's story didn't change. However, the government lied about point after point and then had to backtrack as each lie was revealed.

He lied to his employers, so how do we know he isn't lying now? If they couldn't tell the difference, how can we?

So what if he is? Accusations that he was a spy for Russia is a distraction from the reality of what his actions brought to light. That is what we should be concerned about, and seek redress for from our leaders.

His guilt (or innocence) as a traitor, spy, liar, or anything of the sort is irrelevant.

Some observers, looking at the possibility that Snowden was in league with the Russian government before taking asylum there, have pointed to a report in a Russian newspaper, Kommersant, that before leaving Hong Kong last June Snowden stayed at the Russian consulate. Snowden’s legal adviser, Ben Wizner, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, denied that report, however, saying, “Every news organization in the world has been trying to confirm that story. They haven’t been able to, because it’s false.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a September video interview with the Associated Press:

PUTIN: “I’m going to honestly tell you something I never said before, though I’ve hinted, but I haven’t said it. Snowden first met with our diplomats while in Hong Kong. I was told about it and that he was an intelligence agency employee. ‘What does he want?’ I asked. The answer was that he fought for freedom of information. Fought with illegal activities in the US and violations of international law. I said, ‘tell him that if he wants to stay in Russia he has to stop any work that damages Russia / US relations. We are not an NGO, we have national interests, and we have no intention of damaging Russian / American relations’. And he said, ‘no, I’m a human rights activist and I urge you to join my cause.” I said, ‘no, we aren’t joining his cause. If he wants to fight let him fight on his own.’ So he just walked out and that’s it.”

I agree wholeheartedly about the media's complicity in spreading the FUD that the US Government so clearly wants to stick to Snowden. And it has, I think, at least a little bit. I know we can't have another Walter Kronkite or Edward R. Murrow, but it sure would be nice.

As for people who think it's suspicious that Snowden ended up in the hands of countries that are not the US' best friends, I don't know what you expected. He's not exactly going to be able to hang out in England, right? The only place that someone can go to escape the grasp of the US is a place that tries to elude that grasp as a matter of policy.

"How [did] he arrange travel before he left? How he was ready to go? He had a go bag, if you will.”

Gods, what a dumbass Rogers is.

How did he arrange travel? The same way millions of people do; Orbitz, Travelocity, Kayak, for example.How was he ready to go? Umm, he knew what day he was leaving and planned accordingly.And he had a go bag. And? Lots of people have them. I have one just in case a Hurricane blows in from Florida.

We need to seriously consider culling the herd of voters who keep electing these morons.

I was pretty surprised when I heard one of the quotes from a congressman go unchallenged or at least with an "alleged" tag on an NPR report. I thought the same thing Ed said: "Maybe he was helped by aliens! He can't prove he wasn't!"

Still don't really care about the man much. That goes as far as he's the one who put the issue front and center for the people to judge, the not secret courts to rule, and the many problems to be fixed. He deserves praise for having a set of balls big enough to do the stunt he did, no matter what side you fall on.

All that matters from what he did is what he released. The focus on him by media is precisely what doesn't actually matter. Right now he's safe and won't be touched, I can appreciate that, but it's just not the discussion that should be held.

Enemies of freedom like Feinstein and Rogers will say anything at this point, to justify the abusive practices they have facilitated and failed to oversee. Their "shoot the messenger" mentality has been clear from the day of the first revelation. IMO Snowden gains credibility and status every time an elected official comes out with one of these silly attacks on him - they can't win the argument based on the facts or on good public policy, so they're trying to win by creating a false good guy/bad guy story.

The important thing is the NSA's mission will not be altered by this single traitor's actions. Indeed, their funding is set to increase. If anything, the fallout from the Snowden leaks will encourage a redoubling of efforts.

“He may well have [had help from Russia]. We don’t know at this stage.”

Here's some other unsubstantiated accusations:

He may well have had help from God, we don't know at this stage.He may well have had help from Mickey Mouse, we don't know at this stage.He may well have had help from Elvis, we don't know at this stage.

The fact of the matter is that they don't know, but would like to make accusations none-the-less. Quite pathetic, but not surprising, of contemporary U.S. politicians.

ROGERS: … we noticed that a guy that was worried about privacy issues spent a lot of time, and as a recent DIA report revealed, stealing information the vast majority of which had nothing to do with the NSA program and everything to do with our military capabilities, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, number one.

Which perhaps helps explain why Greenwald often pushes back against calls to bulk release from the Snowden trove by warning of greater legal jeopardy (including charges of treason) and tarnished public opinion. A Greenwald twitter back-and-forth, on that subject, from late Nov:

Anyone who demands that we “release all documents” - or even release large numbers in bulk - is demanding that we violate our agreement with our source, disregard the framework we created when he gave us the documents, jeopardize his interests in multiple ways, and subject him to far greater legal (and other) dangers.

Regardless of the purity of intention, taking classified information from the US Government and then running to China and Russia looks incredibly suspicious. I don't think I've ever read why he chose to go the places he did, and if he wasn't working for a foreign government or planning on selling the information to one, why did he go to the two places that would be the most likely suspects?

I always find it amusing when anyone refers to Hong Kong as China... Not until Snowde's visit did we read this narrative..

I do not think I have ever read anyone explain why they refuse to refer to Hong Kong as "Hong Kong" anymore but instead as "China".. Why have you gone there?

If you have pure intentions only, you won't mind explaining yours suspect wording.. Do you think it's convincing anyone here, at Ars, he's a commie??

I will give you one point: "running to China and Russia looks incredibly suspicious."

So sad, we are living in the movie "Brazil." A fly gets crushed in the gears and suddenly you are spirited away to Guantanamo for questioning as an "enemy combatant" because you accidentally sat next to a known Muslim on your bus ride home. Maybe you will end up in a foreign country being beaten for information about a computed future event pieced together from cell phone chatter in foreign countries.

When you ask for a lawyer, you are told that your side doesn't get legal counsel, and tell it the FISA judge if you disagree. Brazil had it right - fear destroys society and labels humanity and compassion as weakness and detrimental. America in lock-down.

Now take this and add Keith Alexander's ideology. If he thinks we are going the wrong way as a country, like cutting his budget or something, then the emails and cell phone calls of Congress come out on the table - and who's going to question him? Did General Petraeus ask too many questions?

The media has a major role to play in American society, and they’re really abdicating their responsibility to hold power to account.

I think he has answered his own question about why most of the press has been printing wild speculations about him without questioning even basic failures of logic. Nobody likes someone else doing their job for them, even when they have been neglecting it for decades.

I don't totally agree with how Snowden leaked info. But by bringing all this to light and into public debate, the man is a patriot and deserves to come back to the US and cleared of any charges.

A patriot would not have fled the country.

Big fan of Martyrdom, eh? Can I get a list of cross' you've recently allowed yourself to be crucified upon?

EDIT: Point being, actually, that patriotism and martyrdom are not equivalent. Patriotism, if anything, involves some sympathy with the spirit of the founding fathers - and they weren't really a group of martyrs, so far as I've seen... There's very little about America that demands martyrdom.

I'm sure the honorable representatives from the intelligence committee are getting excellent speculative fiction from their friends who lied to congress and the American people.

The problem with spooks is they spend all day dreaming up worst case scenarios to save us from, and wind up doing more damage to our culture of freedom and world respect.

I read a quote once that went something "the harms they tried to prevent were imaginary, but the ones they caused were not."

You could argue it applies to Snowden's revelations harming American reputation and intelligence around the world to prevent imaginary government abuses....

... but I think it more accurately applies to the damage our intelligence agencies and government have done to encryption, business, foreign relations and our freedoms in the name of keeping us safe from the tiny segment of angry foreigners their actions have riled up enough to throw their lives away bothering us waaaay over here where we live.

I don't totally agree with how Snowden leaked info. But by bringing all this to light and into public debate, the man is a patriot and deserves to come back to the US and cleared of any charges.

A patriot would not have fled the country.

A martyr would not have fled the country. But, lets face it, this country doesn't have a great track record when it comes to whistle blowers -- be it private sector or public.

Or do you think that George Washington and pals should have walked up to a british camp and said "yup, that's us. What are you gonna do about it?" I'm not saying Snowden is a modern-day George Washington, but you can absolutely be patriotic and not want to face unjust consequences (even if they're only unjust in your own mind).

edit: and you know what? The NSA thinks it's patriotic, and it's cloaked in secrecy. Why can't Snowden be given that same luxury?

The reason the government is resorting to ad hominem attacks on Snowden is because that's all they have. They don't have any valid response to what he's revealed, and each time they try to make one up another PowerPoint slide is disclosed showing that they are again lying.

He lied to his employers, so how do we know he isn't lying now? If they couldn't tell the difference, how can we?

His employers lied to us, so how do we know they aren't lying now? Snowden's story didn't change. However, the government lied about point after point and then had to backtrack as each lie was revealed.

Edit: Punctuation.

The important thing is the NSA's mission will not be altered by this single traitor's actions. Indeed, their funding is set to increase. If anything, the fallout from the Snowden leaks will encourage a redoubling of efforts.

I don't totally agree with how Snowden leaked info. But by bringing all this to light and into public debate, the man is a patriot and deserves to come back to the US and cleared of any charges.

A patriot would not have fled the country.

A martyr would not have fled the country. But, lets face it, this country doesn't have a great track record when it comes to whistle blowers -- be it private sector or public.

Or do you think that George Washington and pals should have walked up to a british camp and said "yup, that's us. What are you gonna do about it?" I'm not saying Snowden is a modern-day George Washington, but you can absolutely be patriotic and not want to face unjust consequences (even if they're only unjust in your own mind).

edit: and you know what? The NSA thinks it's patriotic, and it's cloaked in secrecy. Why can't Snowden be given that same luxury?

so its ok for snowden to think the NSA shouldnt be cloaked in secrecy, but its ok for him?

Im not saying i agree with Covenant, but its hypocritical to say they shouldnt be, but then say its ok for you to be so. Isnt that exactly what the NSA is saying and Snowden is against that?

Because "the individual" and "the State" are different things, bound by different responsibilities.